Equality Act 2010: Impact on British Society

Anna Sabine Excerpts

Wednesday 10th September 2025 Westminster Hall

[Anna Sabine (Frome and East Somerset) (LD)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Dr Allin-Khan. I thank the hon. Member for Romford (Andrew Rosindell) for bringing this debate, although I do not think it will surprise him to know that the Liberal Democrats do not agree with most of what he has said either, I am sorry.

The Equality Act was a landmark in our legal and social history. It consolidated decades of anti-discrimination laws into one clear piece of legislation and gave expression to values that I think most of us share: fairness, dignity and equal opportunity. Since it came into force, the Act has had a real impact. It has given workers stronger tools to challenge discrimination in the workplace. It has supported equal pay claims and required organisations to make accessibility a priority. The hon. Member for Penistone and Stocksbridge (Dr Tidball) produced an absolutely brilliant video on Instagram yesterday, showing the BBC around this place and, in the process, demonstrating how absolutely inaccessible it is for people like her.

Just as importantly, the Act has helped to normalise the idea that equality is not optional but the baseline that we expect in a modern society. But legislation is only ever as strong as the means of enforcing it. The cuts to both the Equality and Human Rights Commission and to legal aid have made it much harder in practice for people to challenge discrimination. We can pass the most ambitious laws in the world, but if people cannot access justice, rights remain theoretical.

There is also more to do. Although the Act has been vital in tackling workplace discrimination, carers still face significant barriers at work. Too many people—often women—find themselves having to choose between their job and their caring responsibilities. At the last election, the Liberal Democrats called for caring to be recognised as a protected characteristic under the Act, which would place a duty on employers to make reasonable adjustments for those with caring responsibilities, so that people can balance work and care more effectively. This would be a practical reform and it is long overdue.

We must also acknowledge where the Act has gaps. It does not explicitly address intersectionality, whereby people can face multiple and overlapping forms of discrimination. For example, someone might be disabled and from an ethnic minority background, but the way that those disadvantages interact is not always recognised by the current framework. We need to consider that more carefully.

Also, new challenges are emerging. Much of our daily life now takes place online—at work, in education and in our social lives. Digital exclusion and online discrimination and abuse are real and growing problems. If equality is to mean anything in the 21st century, the protections that we offer must evolve to meet new realities.

The Equality Act should provide a framework that protects all groups. It should not be used to stoke so-called culture wars or to set the rights of one community against those of another, for example by pitting the majority population—whoever they are—against the diverse. Our approach should be evidence-based, respectful and rooted in the belief that upholding the rights of one group strengthens the rights of all.

The Equality Act was a landmark. Our task now is to defend it, to strengthen it and to ensure that it continues to live up to its original promise of fairness, dignity and equal opportunity for everyone.

Oral Answers to Questions

Anna Sabine Excerpts

Tuesday 25th February 2025 Commons Chamber

[Wera Hobhouse (Bath) (LD)]

5. What assessment he has made of the potential merits of sanctioning violent illegal Israeli settlers.

[Anna Sabine (Frome and East Somerset) (LD)]

23. What assessment he has made of the potential merits of sanctioning violent illegal Israeli settlers.

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs (Mr Hamish Falconer)]

Settler violence is unacceptable. On 15 October the UK sanctioned three outposts and four entities linked to violence in the west bank under the global human rights regime. Those measures will help bring accountability to those who have supported and perpetrated such heinous abuses of human rights. The Government do not comment on future sanctions measures, as to do so would reduce their impact.

[Mr Falconer]

We have condemned the unacceptable language that has been used by Israeli Minister Bezalel Smotrich and former Minister Mr Ben-Gvir. The Foreign Secretary, and all Ministers, have been clear with their Israeli counterparts that the Israeli Government must clamp down on settler violence, as the Foreign Secretary said earlier, and end the settlement expansion. As I said in my original answer, we will not comment on future sanctions, as to do so could reduce their impact.

[Anna Sabine]

Many people in my constituency are passionate about resolving the situation between Israel and Palestine, and there are concerns that violence in the west bank has increased and illegal settlements have continued to expand. Does the Minister agree that if he also wants to see a reduction in settler violence, we should be considering sanctioning those settlements?

[Mr Falconer]

I am seriously concerned by the expansion of Israel’s operations in the west bank, and 40,000 Palestinians have reportedly been displaced. Palestinians must be allowed home, civilians must be protected, and the destruction of civilian infrastructure minimised. Stability is essential at this crucial time. We recognise Israel’s security concerns, but it must show restraint and ensure that its operations are commensurate with the threat posed. I refer to my previous answer on sanctions.